For those opposed to the death penalty, explain why it shouldn't be used in this case

24" X 72" steel pipe, end caps welded on with a slop hole in it the top, and slop hole in the bottom. When he dies, you bury the pipe. If he screams alot, you put a few inches of cement around it so nobody has to hear him.

It might be just me, but I believe that all criminals serving a life sentence without the possibility for parole should be executed. I dont think taxes should be spent to prolong the lives of people who have contributed nothing to society and have repeatedly proved they would only do more harm to society if ever released. I likely sound barbaric, but unless we completely remove the worst criminal elements from the prison systems, there will never be any real chance for rehabilitating ex-convicts. Should we really be giving serial rapists 3 hots and a cot?

This may sound contradictory, but I do believe that all human life is precious, but there comes a time when wicked people who have caused harm to countless innocents, those that know how to only cause pain and suffering, should be put to death. There is no justification for allowing such people (whom have no redeeming qualities whatsoever or are of any benefit to society) to live out the remainder of their natural lives sucking up taxpayer dollars.

ps. I dont know about the costs, but I do believe some states still use a rope.

But thats just my opinion.

[edit on 9-6-2008 by ts117]

Personally, not only do I feel that they should not be executed, but I also feel that they should be made comfortable and given the opportunity to better themselves.

I don't believe in punishment, vengeance, or inflicting suffering in kind to those who have caused others to suffer. The thought of even a monsterous criminal suffering, frankly, saddens me. I'm not ashamed of that, either.

I don't take glee in the death penalty for one main reason.
The killer is someones child as well and so I feel bad for them.
As a matter of fact it sickens me to see people outside of the prisons cheering when someone is executed. (After all they were apparently very sick people)
That being said I think that when a murderer has been caught I think that the execution should take place in short order and be as swift as possible.
I dont know if that made sense or not. LOL

I dont support the death penalty because it is irreversible, and our justice system is too flawed to insure innocent people do not get murdered by their own government.

This was a horrible crime. No question. Why he was out on the street, instead of being in psychiatric care is the question in my opinion. Someone with a history of violence that runs all the way back to childhood should have been safely medicated and locked away in a hospital. Clearly the guy is insane, and has been since he was a kid.

Originally posted by AceWombat04
Personally, not only do I feel that they should not be executed, but I also feel that they should be made comfortable and given the opportunity to better themselves.

Ok explain to me just exactly why this man should be made comfortable after everything he did to that woman ? She will be emotionally and probably psyically scarred for the rest of her life. How comfortable do you think that she was when he was raping, and sodomizing her ? How about when he threw boiling water on her, or cracked her skull, or told her to gouge her own eyes out, or glued her mouth shut do you think she was comfortable ? How long do you think it's going to be before she's ever truely comfortable again ?


He is a multiple repeat offender that has been involved in murder since he was a child. He spent 8 years in jail for attempted murder. He has had a chance to better himself, it doesn't seem as though he wants to do that. He doesn't deserve comfort, he deserves life in solitary confinement.

Yes AceWombat04 please explain why you think he should be made comfortable.. do you mean showing him love? Giving him food and hugs & telling him God loves him? As much as I doubt that would work, you never ever know... Maybe thats what he really needs, not death or punishment.
Maybe if someone truly showed him love and showed him the right way. I dont know.. Maybe he was tormented and tortured by his mother/father?
I know his a human like the rest of us, but he should be locked up for a long time unless he can show he has changed and should be let out into society again.

Of course I don't think his victim was "comfortable." I feel deeply for the victim. I believe people like this should be, and must be, isolated from society.

I just don't agree with the means by which that is presetly accomplished. If the goals are...

1. To prevent them from doing further harm to other human beings
   
2. To ensure that they are not capable of interacting with the larger society, and hence, finding new victims to prey upon
   
3. Rehabilitation where and when possible
   

... then in my opinion all of the above objectives can and should be met in humane, compassionate ways. I do not regard total, absolute solitary confinement as compassionate or humane. I feel that never seeing the sky, and never having at least indirect communication with other human beings are also less than humane. I have long believed that criminals should have more of their human needs met, beyond just what is required to keep them alive and free from overt abuse.

Some people base their opinion of what should be done with this person on what they did to their victim, and how they should be punished for it. I respect those views, but I don't share them. For me, I would consider that vengeance on my part against this person. I don't believe in or practice vengeance. I won't condemn or judge others for doing otherwise, but I won't condone or support it either. It's just not a part of who I am.

Furthermore, there are things I don't know about this person. Do they have a mental disorder? Are they a psychopath? Could they stop themselves? It has been repeatedly pointed out in this thread that he has been involved in murder since childhood. Can we really be fully convinced that anyone with that kind of record and who is capable of such acts is mentally healthy? I have none of that information. None of it would constitute an excuse of course; nothing could. I want to understand, though. Agreement isn't required for understanding.

This may shock some people: I feel love for this criminal. I do not want them to suffer anymore than I want their victim to have suffered what they did at his hands. It is my hope that someday we as a species will learn more about what it is that creates monsters like this so that they can be prevented, and perhaps someday, helped.

Edited for clarity.

[edit on 6/10/2008 by AceWombat04]

[edit on 6/10/2008 by AceWombat04]

reply to post by AceWombat04


you are kidding right????

Lets put you in place of that young girl...you get raped beaten cut up and you personally would be ok with it....LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE!!

If it was my daughter the guy would never make it to trial and I would make sure he died by my hands...

People debate whether the death penalty is the right or wrong way to go....What about justice? What sort of justice will make things right for this young lady?

People like this are not canidates for reform. You wont ever make this guy a proper member of society...he should be killed. I think I should get a say in it too. Why waste my tax dollars on a piece of crap like this.

We have beome a weak soceity, where freakin criminals have rights! Theives that get shot while trying to rob a home and people are in an uproar about it...

I say that if you were on the receiving end of such voilence you wouldnt be saying that the bastard that did it needed a comfy blanket, a nonalerginic pillow and cable....whatever helps you sleep at night...

Originally posted by AceWombat04
Some people base their opinion of what should be done with this person on what they did to their victim, and how they should be punished for it. I respect those views, but I don't share them.

Ok now you've really confused me. Just what exactly would you have us take into consideration when determining what should be done with the criminal if not what they did to their victim ?

Originally posted by chise61

Originally posted by AceWombat04
Some people base their opinion of what should be done with this person on what they did to their victim, and how they should be punished for it. I respect those views, but I don't share them.

Ok now you've really confused me. Just what exactly would you have us take into consideration when determining what should be done with the criminal if not what they did to their victim ?

I wouldn't "have you guys" do anything. I'm only saying what I would do and what I feel.

My point was that for many, the impulse toward punishing the criminal is based upon the severity of the crime, whereas for me, there is no impulse toward vengeance/punishment in the first place. Since that's not a factor for me personally, I don't decide what I think should be done with the perpetrator of the crime based on severity but according to a personal concept of equal rights and compassion. I believe in a minimum standard for quality of life that even prisoners - convicted of any crime - should have rights to.

Yes, separate him from society. Yes, protect society from him. Yes, take care of and compensate his victim in every way. I just don't agree with killing him, causing him to suffer, or making his life a living hell. To me that amounts to punishment and vengeance, not justice. It serves no purpose (at least no purpose that couldn't be achieved without causing him discomfort or death) other than to satiate the desire for vengeance on the part of his victim or others, which while completely understandable, I disagree with. I believe humanity is capable of better and more than to forever condemn anyone who ever does something this horrible to death or eternal banishment. We're more intelligent, progressive, compassionate, imaginative, and creative than that in my opinion... or should be.

Want someone to suffer?

Keep them alive, and keep them in the general population of the prison.

State sponsored murder is still murder, and it demeans and brutalizes any society which practices it.

The death penalty is religious in nature - it's an eye for an eye, but those who follow jesus are supposed to be christians and are supposed to practice forgiveness.

I fail to see much difference between the DP in the US and the DP as some muslim nations practice it.

Both are barbaric and have no place in the modern world.

Originally posted by AceWombat04
Personally, not only do I feel that they should not be executed, but I also feel that they should be made comfortable and given the opportunity to better themselves.

I don't believe in punishment, vengeance, or inflicting suffering in kind to those who have caused others to suffer. The thought of even a monsterous criminal suffering, frankly, saddens me. I'm not ashamed of that, either.

You've obviously never had a family member beaten/tortured and murdered, have you? I have, and let me just say that making this scum comfortable is not even fleeting thought in my head. The scum should have taken it upon themselves to better themselves *before* they tortured/hurt someone, and maybe it would have never happened.


Hmm... let me torture/murder someone and then the system will take care of me, help me get a good education, feed me, give me all the comforts of a free person, etc., so when I get out, the next time I decide to torture/murder someone, I'll be so much smarter about it, I won't get caught.

When you've had someone taken from you in a horrific way, and then you suggest you give this person special treatment ( comforts, education, etc)-- to me, you minimalize the death of my loved one. Why should they deserve special treatment, when my family member is gone and will never be able to attain those same things??

Originally posted by AceWombat04


You've obviously never had a family member beaten/tortured and murdered, have you? I have, and let me just say that making this scum comfortable is not even fleeting thought in my head. The scum should have taken it upon themselves to better themselves *before* they tortured/hurt someone, and maybe it would have never happened.


Hmm... let me torture/murder someone and then the system will take care of me, help me get a good education, feed me, give me all the comforts of a free person, etc., so when I get out, the next time I decide to torture/murder someone, I'll be so much smarter about it, I won't get caught.

When you've had someone taken from you in a horrific way, and then you suggest you give this person special treatment ( comforts, education, etc)-- to me, you minimalize the death of my loved one. Why should they deserve special treatment, when my family member is gone and will never be able to attain those same things??

I'm so sorry that you have suffered in that way. That’s not lip service or just words, whether you choose to believe me or not. I really am. I'm sure the last thing you want is my sympathy, but I do care, and I am sorry.

My choices and feelings differ from yours, however. Please try to respect that, even if you cannot agree. The best friend I ever had - a person I regarded as a brother - and the only person I have yet met in this world to truly understand me; someone I shared everything with; someone I loved and cherished as much as I have ever loved anyone, including my own parents - was taken from me by murder.

The first thing I did was pray (I'm not religious; I have my own equivalent of prayer though) for his murderer to know peace; to be become free of the life of violence they were leading at the time - and I forgave them. I don't hate them. I don't want them to suffer. I want them to be comfortable, given a chance to improve themselves, given psychiatric care, and if all else fails, for them to be separated from society in a way that doesn't cause them to suffer. Yes - I would even go so far as to say I love them.

I respect your view, and you have my sorrow for your pain. I just have a very different point of view. I would like to believe that we - not only humanity, but you and I - can at least be wise and respectful enough to say to one another, "I don't agree with you, but I respect you and wish you all the best." That's what I'm saying to you, for whatever that's worth.

Peace.

We don't kill torturers, rapists and murderers in the US, we make them president.

to those who are opposed to the death penalty it doesnt matter what the crime is..we dont believe that it is up to us to make that judgement, to me that judgement can only be made by my god, its far more than what the person did it has nuttin to do with that..

Originally posted by AceWombat04



I respect your view, and you have my sorrow for your pain. I just have a very different point of view. I would like to believe that we - not only humanity, but you and I - can at least be wise and respectful enough to say to one another, "I don't agree with you, but I respect you and wish you all the best." That's what I'm saying to you, for whatever that's worth.

Peace.

We can both agree to disagree on this subject. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I respect your opinion.

And I respect yours. I'm heartened that we can say that too one another. All too often that isn't what happens when people on ATS have disagreements. Thank-you. It means a lot to me, for whatever that's worth.

Originally posted by AceWombat04
My point was that for many, the impulse toward punishing the criminal is based upon the severity of the crime, whereas for me, there is no impulse toward vengeance/punishment in the first place. Since that's not a factor for me personally, I don't decide what I think should be done with the perpetrator of the crime based on severity but according to a personal concept of equal rights and compassion. I believe in a minimum standard for quality of life that even prisoners - convicted of any crime - should have rights to.

Yes, separate him from society. Yes, protect society from him. Yes, take care of and compensate his victim in every way.

This is what i'm not understanding, if you feel that the severity of the crime should not be taken into account when sentencing this man, then what exactly do you feel should be taken in to account ?



Are you saying that you believe that this man is entitled to the same rights and compassion as the woman that he tortured horrendously for 19 hours ? I believe that the minute he took away that woman's rights he forfited his own.



In what ways can she be compensated ? Who knows how long it will be (if ever) before she is able to step in to an elevator again. What about her emotional scarring, her pysical scarring, how can that be compensated ? She must have been a person that trusted people being that she stopped to answer his question, i'm sure that that trust has been taken away from her, how will she be compensated for that ?



If i am misunderstanding you, i apologize, but it seems as though you are focused more on his rights than on hers. You seem more concerned with what will happen to him, than with what happened to her. I am not trying to attack you, i'm just trying to understand your thought process.



One more thing, and i say this only because i think that maybe you do not realize that you are doing it. You refer to the man as he, him, but you consistently refer to the woman as the victim, or his victim. In doing so you depersonalize her, she is not a victim, but a person and she is not "his victim" (that gives him ownership of her) she is a person that he assaulted.

reply to post by chise61

I don't feel attacked by your questions. They're fair queries in my opinion. I'll try to better explain my feelings and choice of words. I welcome your desire to understand rather than attack. I pledge to refrain from attacks in kind.

My use of the term "his victim" has nothing to do with his "ownership" of her or power over her. If you choose to interpret it as such, that if your choice, however it is an incorrect interpretation of the meaning behind my choice of words. Indeed, quite to the contrary, I was attempting to avoid minimizing the fact that she suffered (and avoid giving precisely the impression you seem to have gotten) by continually pointing out that he preyed on her and that she was victimized by his horrible acts. I didn't want to call her, simply, "her," or "the woman in this case." I wanted to underline the fact that she suffered, ironically. Just as I have a different opinion than your own, everyone also has different semantics, choices of wording, etc. To me, "victim" has nothing to do with power or status, and is just a word meaning "the person who suffered at the hands of the assailant." I apologize if I have been inarticulate in any way, but no matter how one chooses to word things, I've found that there is always a chance that someone will misinterpret it or wish that you had stated your feelings in a different way. I hope this clarification helps convey what I was trying to say more accurately.

When I say that we should "compensate" her in every way, I mean that in my opinion she should be cared for, given psychological assistance, loved, and should have any medical or legal expenses stemming from this matter paid for. She shouldn't have to suffer that burden in addition to what she's already gone through. I wasn't implying in any way that what happened to her can ever be rectified or that her suffering can be compensated for. I hope that makes more sense.

You are incorrect in your assessment that I care more about the criminal than the victim, though I can comprehend your reason for thinking that. In fact my very point has been that I care about everyone equally. That's the simplest way to describe how I feel about this issue. The thread challenged opponents of the death penalty to explain why it shouldn't be used in this case. As a result, I focused on the reasons why I felt execution shouldn't be used, and how I think the prisoner should be treated instead. There's no more to it than that.

As for not taking into consideration the severity of the crime, I'll try to explain again what I mean. For me, the severity of the crime shouldn't result in a worse or less severe penalty, apart from the term of the prisoner's sentence (life imprisonment would be my favored outcome in this instance) and the degree to which they are isolated from society (only indirect contact such as phone or - strictly monitored - internet would be my preference in this case.) Many people, understandably, feel that once a certain threshold is passed, or a certain standard met, then death or horrendous treatment are fair. I disagree with that; I believe that there should be a maximum penalty under the law that protects society, but which precludes death, prevents poor treatment, and does not subject any prisoner to total isolation from all that is good of pleasurable in the world. I believe they should have very strictly monitored access to music, films, literature, a healthy diet, regular high quality medical care (something we all still don't have outside prison either sadly,) psychological care (mandatory if need be,) and limited indirect communication.

In short, the best way I know to state my feelings and beliefs is this: I love every human being on the face of the Earth equally, and while acknowledging the need to protect society from monstrous beings such as this man, I do not agree with punishment, vengeance, or execution, and maintain that killers can be kept away from society without causing them suffering in turn.

A system and the means to accomplish what I'm envisioning, however, do not yet exist. It's probably a pipe dream, too. It's my dream though, and I'm entitled to it - just as others are entitled to their desire to see this man hang (or worse.)

I don't know how to explain my beliefs with greater clarity than the above.

Edited for typos.

[edit on 6/12/2008 by AceWombat04]